This superb essay is a much-needed corrective. Shylock is not merely the most complex character in the play, as well as the one persecuted from beginning to end; he is the only character other than his daughter with any complexity at all. Ms. Vanita is probably right: whomever titled her essay couldn’t bother to read it. Her analogy to the vicious hatred of Israel is spot-on: Shylock is vengeful in no context and the Israelis have nothing better to do than hurt Gazan children. There are no hostages being tortured for nearly 2 years in Gaza, no Hamas in Gaza, no Hamas fan club in Gaza, there was no pogrom, or vow by Hamas to repeat its abomination again and again.
So glad. I hope you received a serious apology but not holding my breath. What you say is very important. Tablet not long ago published some rote thing asserting that Shakespeare is antisemitic. I hope you’ve seen or will see Olivier’s wonderful portrait of Shylock — the director’s handling of the end, both with Shylock and Jessica, is devastating. Also, please pardon me in case I’m wrong, but I think the Scotsmen are unable to remain continent when they hear bagpipes because they’re thrilled and excited, not angry, and Shylock’s list isn’t about unreasoning hatred but unreason itself. G-d bless you, Ms. Vanita.
It's been a long while since I've reread this play in particular but any Shakespeare actually--I was a master's degree student in English Literature then became a therapist. I loved your article. And the fact that the play and its words are so open to variable interpretations is the genius of Shakespeare...and who really knows who Shakespeare was or what he thought. He was a keen observer of humans of all stripes, and a brilliant poet as he conveyed what he saw and understood. Your essay caused me to rethink and reexamine and reappreciate--both the literature and the current situation for Israel and Jews. Thank you so much!
I will read your whole article in earnest. However, the first sentence may not be accurate. It is of course a truism but it not necessarily the whole truth or factual. Even though it is based on a fact. Yes there was a legal banishment of Jews from the 1200's. Yet,.. while the banishment was in effect albeit in the 1500's, there were about 100 Jews who lived in London.
Therefore your statement that based on the initial banishment from the 1200's therefore Shakespeare could not have met any Jews. However!!! However, at least by and from the mid-1500's there were about 100 Jews living in London. Therefore Shakespeare could have met Jews in London when he arrived there.
In fact, it seems that 5 of those London Jews were Court Musicians. They were the five Basano brothers. They also had interest and experience in theatre.
Therefore, Shakespeare easily could have met them.
That fact as you mention is a banishment of Jews from England in the 1200's. In reality, if no other factual example provides evidence and proof that your first sentence, truism though it is, is not the whole truth.
King Henry VIII had depression. He heard or was advised that music can lift one's spirits i.e. remove or lessen depression. In the same period it was known that The Doge or 'governor of Venice' also had depression and had Court musicians who helped cure him of depression. King Henry VIII sent an envoy to invesigate and meet the said musicians and possibly hire them to come to England to play for King Henry VIII. The five Brothers Bassano of Venice were thus hired and moved to London.
At first they were housed in Royal Quarters for such employees. Soon enough they were able to move to their own London property. The Bassanos were Jewish. As were other 'clans' of Bassanos who lived in a few other parts of Italy at least since the Spanish Inquisition.
There is one Professor of Musicology who has written a book about the Bassanos. One of those Brothers married in London and had a daughter who became one of England's first women writers/poets. That was Emilia Bassano Lanier. Lanier was her married name. The Bassano's lived in the district where other Jews lived. YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Jews LIVED IN LONDON in the 1500s. YES, they lived England in London in particular WHILE the ban of the 1200s was still 'on the books'.
Like the Bassano's and like in many countries Jews were simply allowed or tolerated or invited because they had particular skills, trades, or knowledge. There were approximately 100 Jews in that section of London. I think it was in or near Shoreditch.
There was a shtebel i.e. a 'synagogue' hidden likely in someone's home. So though the 100 or so Jews lived in London they were not to show themselves outside dressed or conspicuously dressed as Jews. The Bassono's as mentioned were successful enough to purchase their own property to live in as well as other properties related to their professions which included making musical instruments with a speciality of Recorders i.e. wooden wind instruments.
It SEEMS according to some, that the Bassanos also owned at least 1 theatre and were likely also involved in producing theatre and plays including writing and/or translating plays from Italian. They lived in London from the mid 1500s. There are several reasons just mentioned that you opening sentence, though based on a truism and a single fact of legal banishment, has to face the obvious factual indicators above which directly contradict your opening sentence.
I am not sure that the title is refers to Shakespeare’s support of Jew Hatred… in fact, I read the opposite. Shakespeare was actually articulating the Jew hatred of his day and, frankly, offering fairly strong arguments as to the “Judeophobia” that you’ve presented.
However, in many of your analogies to today’s situations, you, too, seemed to have asserted that Shakespeare’s description of the continued arguments in the play as an updated argument.
A “playbook” that is still being used.
Or, as Ecclessiastes points out, “there is nothing new under the sun”.
While the idea of the “playbook” may be poorly worded, I, personally, did not see any bias as to the author’s intent. Conversely, your beautiful article in many ways actually noted that Shakespeare understood the irrationality of the phobia through Shylock’s dialogue.
Dear Ruth, you’ve written a brilliant, incisive analysis of this almost incomprehensible moment in Jewish and Israeli history. Your insights clarify what so many seek to obscure by layering and heaping complexity (better known as “context”) upon the oldest hatred. Even now as Israel fights to protect the Druze in Syria, Israeli strikes are “recontextualized” as aggression befitting the blood lust of Israel, Jews, those of us - we’re continually being told, even by Elmo - who relish bombing and shooting innocent Palestinians in Gaza. Because that’s who we Jews are, they insist, while shouting “Death, death to the IDF,” as the BBC livestreams its own blood libels to audiences in real time, shamelessly for all to see. Thank you always for your breathtaking posts. I’m profoundly grateful.
Thank you for a fascinating article. What do you think motivated Shakespeare to write Merchant of Venice?
I saw the brilliant version of this play staged in 2023 by British actor/director Tracy-Ann Oberman. She transported it to London’s East End in the 1930s and a female Shylock. Very pertinent in the political climate…
British student of history here. The Elizabethan crowd watching this play regularly saw and took part in gross cruelty to "outsiders", anyone foreign or strange (mentally ill or disabled) on the street could be targeted and would be beaten, even killed, to cheers from a street audience. It was a constant problem for the London authorities, especially with the City of London apprentices, who took any excuse to riot and destroy "outsiders" property. The vile abuse dealt out to Shylock in the play would have seemed nothing abnormal to Shakespeare's audiences (and officially justified, in theological terms, not that the mob really cared about religion).
Reading Shylock's words as you set them out here, and remembering many stage productions of The Merchant, I wondered if anyone has ever cast an African-American in the role? Since the days of the Civil Rights Movement, Black characters have been given rather noble and "saintly" responses, when persecuted, in plays or film, by racists. Whereas Jewish actors are seen as "White" (as Israelis are) and the dynamic is different. A Black Shylock would certainly give a modern audience a chance to see the Christian characters' 'phobia as it truly was - irrational hate - stripping away bogus justifications like the difference of religion and the "evil' of money-lending.
Indeed. Although the religious aspect of Jew-hate in Europe can never be overstated, I grew up hearing elderly Catholics talk about "Christ killers". My thought experiment about using a Black actor would be to prick the hypocrites in the modern audience who seem to wave away current antisemitism as "understandable" because they have a view that says Arabs = Brown people, Israelis = white. Nonsense of course.
Dear Ruth, I finally came back to finish reading your essay today. We exchanged Comment/Reply on July 14th. As several other Commenters have now noted and I confirm - your writing and multi-level considerations made this piece and absolute masterpiece.
I see that you also teach and write on Hindu Philosophy. The unusual richness of the piece is certainly enhanced from a deep Philosphical yet real world understanding which you possess. Although I am not at all an academic I'd like to invite you to have a peek at some of my work including writings. Quickest intro access is via www dot iraseid dot com Congratulations on such a piece indicative of much more of your work to be explored and enjoyed. Regards, Ira
I don't have a substack per se. But I think substack automatically sets up a substack for anyone who even leaves a Comment on any substack?? I'm not quite sure how Substack works as I've never looked into it. However Ilea have a blog via my website and people can leave comments via that site. I'll now look in to Substack under my name and see what comes up.
Phobia is usually defined as an irrational, morbid fear of a thing, as in gynophobia, the fear of women.
Misia is usually defined as a hatred of a thing, as in misogyny, the hatred of women.
Judophobia would thus be an irrational fear of Jews while Judomesia would be a hatred of Jews. Thus one can fear a thing without desiring to kill it, but if one hates a thing, then wishing to eliminate it would be an expected reaction. And given the opportunity, haters do execute their hatreds in real time.
It is necessary to make the distinction between a phobia and a misia because otherwise for political or propaganda purposes one could manipulate the term "phobia" to disguise hatred, in so doing, making violence socially acceptable, as we see more and more on our streets and campuses.
Anthony Julius in the Trials od the Diaspora demonstrated very convincingly that there is a lot of anti Semitism in English literature began with Chaucer and continued with Shakespeare and which is evident in the UK media today
This superb essay is a much-needed corrective. Shylock is not merely the most complex character in the play, as well as the one persecuted from beginning to end; he is the only character other than his daughter with any complexity at all. Ms. Vanita is probably right: whomever titled her essay couldn’t bother to read it. Her analogy to the vicious hatred of Israel is spot-on: Shylock is vengeful in no context and the Israelis have nothing better to do than hurt Gazan children. There are no hostages being tortured for nearly 2 years in Gaza, no Hamas in Gaza, no Hamas fan club in Gaza, there was no pogrom, or vow by Hamas to repeat its abomination again and again.
Thank you so much.
❤️
So glad. I hope you received a serious apology but not holding my breath. What you say is very important. Tablet not long ago published some rote thing asserting that Shakespeare is antisemitic. I hope you’ve seen or will see Olivier’s wonderful portrait of Shylock — the director’s handling of the end, both with Shylock and Jessica, is devastating. Also, please pardon me in case I’m wrong, but I think the Scotsmen are unable to remain continent when they hear bagpipes because they’re thrilled and excited, not angry, and Shylock’s list isn’t about unreasoning hatred but unreason itself. G-d bless you, Ms. Vanita.
Montana! Super! They’re privileged to have such a thoughtful, searching, brave professor.
It's been a long while since I've reread this play in particular but any Shakespeare actually--I was a master's degree student in English Literature then became a therapist. I loved your article. And the fact that the play and its words are so open to variable interpretations is the genius of Shakespeare...and who really knows who Shakespeare was or what he thought. He was a keen observer of humans of all stripes, and a brilliant poet as he conveyed what he saw and understood. Your essay caused me to rethink and reexamine and reappreciate--both the literature and the current situation for Israel and Jews. Thank you so much!
Superb article. Thank you!
Ruth, this is a profound explanation of what Merchant is about. As a Christian who supports Jews and Israel, I thank you.
I will read your whole article in earnest. However, the first sentence may not be accurate. It is of course a truism but it not necessarily the whole truth or factual. Even though it is based on a fact. Yes there was a legal banishment of Jews from the 1200's. Yet,.. while the banishment was in effect albeit in the 1500's, there were about 100 Jews who lived in London.
Therefore your statement that based on the initial banishment from the 1200's therefore Shakespeare could not have met any Jews. However!!! However, at least by and from the mid-1500's there were about 100 Jews living in London. Therefore Shakespeare could have met Jews in London when he arrived there.
In fact, it seems that 5 of those London Jews were Court Musicians. They were the five Basano brothers. They also had interest and experience in theatre.
Therefore, Shakespeare easily could have met them.
That fact as you mention is a banishment of Jews from England in the 1200's. In reality, if no other factual example provides evidence and proof that your first sentence, truism though it is, is not the whole truth.
King Henry VIII had depression. He heard or was advised that music can lift one's spirits i.e. remove or lessen depression. In the same period it was known that The Doge or 'governor of Venice' also had depression and had Court musicians who helped cure him of depression. King Henry VIII sent an envoy to invesigate and meet the said musicians and possibly hire them to come to England to play for King Henry VIII. The five Brothers Bassano of Venice were thus hired and moved to London.
At first they were housed in Royal Quarters for such employees. Soon enough they were able to move to their own London property. The Bassanos were Jewish. As were other 'clans' of Bassanos who lived in a few other parts of Italy at least since the Spanish Inquisition.
There is one Professor of Musicology who has written a book about the Bassanos. One of those Brothers married in London and had a daughter who became one of England's first women writers/poets. That was Emilia Bassano Lanier. Lanier was her married name. The Bassano's lived in the district where other Jews lived. YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Jews LIVED IN LONDON in the 1500s. YES, they lived England in London in particular WHILE the ban of the 1200s was still 'on the books'.
Like the Bassano's and like in many countries Jews were simply allowed or tolerated or invited because they had particular skills, trades, or knowledge. There were approximately 100 Jews in that section of London. I think it was in or near Shoreditch.
There was a shtebel i.e. a 'synagogue' hidden likely in someone's home. So though the 100 or so Jews lived in London they were not to show themselves outside dressed or conspicuously dressed as Jews. The Bassono's as mentioned were successful enough to purchase their own property to live in as well as other properties related to their professions which included making musical instruments with a speciality of Recorders i.e. wooden wind instruments.
It SEEMS according to some, that the Bassanos also owned at least 1 theatre and were likely also involved in producing theatre and plays including writing and/or translating plays from Italian. They lived in London from the mid 1500s. There are several reasons just mentioned that you opening sentence, though based on a truism and a single fact of legal banishment, has to face the obvious factual indicators above which directly contradict your opening sentence.
Ms. Vanita
I am not sure that the title is refers to Shakespeare’s support of Jew Hatred… in fact, I read the opposite. Shakespeare was actually articulating the Jew hatred of his day and, frankly, offering fairly strong arguments as to the “Judeophobia” that you’ve presented.
However, in many of your analogies to today’s situations, you, too, seemed to have asserted that Shakespeare’s description of the continued arguments in the play as an updated argument.
A “playbook” that is still being used.
Or, as Ecclessiastes points out, “there is nothing new under the sun”.
While the idea of the “playbook” may be poorly worded, I, personally, did not see any bias as to the author’s intent. Conversely, your beautiful article in many ways actually noted that Shakespeare understood the irrationality of the phobia through Shylock’s dialogue.
What if the writer had used a word such as "predicted"? ...that Shakespeare predicted modern antisemitism's playbook?
How about that! Perhaps just a case of sloppiness. No pound of flesh required this time?
Dear Ruth, you’ve written a brilliant, incisive analysis of this almost incomprehensible moment in Jewish and Israeli history. Your insights clarify what so many seek to obscure by layering and heaping complexity (better known as “context”) upon the oldest hatred. Even now as Israel fights to protect the Druze in Syria, Israeli strikes are “recontextualized” as aggression befitting the blood lust of Israel, Jews, those of us - we’re continually being told, even by Elmo - who relish bombing and shooting innocent Palestinians in Gaza. Because that’s who we Jews are, they insist, while shouting “Death, death to the IDF,” as the BBC livestreams its own blood libels to audiences in real time, shamelessly for all to see. Thank you always for your breathtaking posts. I’m profoundly grateful.
Thank you for a fascinating article. What do you think motivated Shakespeare to write Merchant of Venice?
I saw the brilliant version of this play staged in 2023 by British actor/director Tracy-Ann Oberman. She transported it to London’s East End in the 1930s and a female Shylock. Very pertinent in the political climate…
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Ze2d_n4pRuw&pp=ygUXbWVyY2hhbnQgb2YgdmVuaWNlIDE5MzY%3D
Beautifully written.
and thx
Powerful and insightful piece …btw his (Shakespeare’s) perspicacity betokens a deep intimacy with the Jewish psyche - odd when no Jews in his midst.
Good points… and maybe the Dark Lady - Sonnet 127 was Jewish…
Excellent piece, thank you.
British student of history here. The Elizabethan crowd watching this play regularly saw and took part in gross cruelty to "outsiders", anyone foreign or strange (mentally ill or disabled) on the street could be targeted and would be beaten, even killed, to cheers from a street audience. It was a constant problem for the London authorities, especially with the City of London apprentices, who took any excuse to riot and destroy "outsiders" property. The vile abuse dealt out to Shylock in the play would have seemed nothing abnormal to Shakespeare's audiences (and officially justified, in theological terms, not that the mob really cared about religion).
Reading Shylock's words as you set them out here, and remembering many stage productions of The Merchant, I wondered if anyone has ever cast an African-American in the role? Since the days of the Civil Rights Movement, Black characters have been given rather noble and "saintly" responses, when persecuted, in plays or film, by racists. Whereas Jewish actors are seen as "White" (as Israelis are) and the dynamic is different. A Black Shylock would certainly give a modern audience a chance to see the Christian characters' 'phobia as it truly was - irrational hate - stripping away bogus justifications like the difference of religion and the "evil' of money-lending.
Indeed. Although the religious aspect of Jew-hate in Europe can never be overstated, I grew up hearing elderly Catholics talk about "Christ killers". My thought experiment about using a Black actor would be to prick the hypocrites in the modern audience who seem to wave away current antisemitism as "understandable" because they have a view that says Arabs = Brown people, Israelis = white. Nonsense of course.
I will look out for your book.
Dear Ruth, I finally came back to finish reading your essay today. We exchanged Comment/Reply on July 14th. As several other Commenters have now noted and I confirm - your writing and multi-level considerations made this piece and absolute masterpiece.
I see that you also teach and write on Hindu Philosophy. The unusual richness of the piece is certainly enhanced from a deep Philosphical yet real world understanding which you possess. Although I am not at all an academic I'd like to invite you to have a peek at some of my work including writings. Quickest intro access is via www dot iraseid dot com Congratulations on such a piece indicative of much more of your work to be explored and enjoyed. Regards, Ira
Your welcome. Just had a quick peek at your Substack thank you. I left a Reply.
I don't have a substack per se. But I think substack automatically sets up a substack for anyone who even leaves a Comment on any substack?? I'm not quite sure how Substack works as I've never looked into it. However Ilea have a blog via my website and people can leave comments via that site. I'll now look in to Substack under my name and see what comes up.
Shylock “ It was my turquoise; I had it of Leah when I was a bachelor: I would not have given it for a wilderness of monkeys.”
Presumably those monkeys obtained a wilderness of typewriters and then wrote Shakespeare’s plays 😂
Phobia is usually defined as an irrational, morbid fear of a thing, as in gynophobia, the fear of women.
Misia is usually defined as a hatred of a thing, as in misogyny, the hatred of women.
Judophobia would thus be an irrational fear of Jews while Judomesia would be a hatred of Jews. Thus one can fear a thing without desiring to kill it, but if one hates a thing, then wishing to eliminate it would be an expected reaction. And given the opportunity, haters do execute their hatreds in real time.
It is necessary to make the distinction between a phobia and a misia because otherwise for political or propaganda purposes one could manipulate the term "phobia" to disguise hatred, in so doing, making violence socially acceptable, as we see more and more on our streets and campuses.
Anthony Julius in the Trials od the Diaspora demonstrated very convincingly that there is a lot of anti Semitism in English literature began with Chaucer and continued with Shakespeare and which is evident in the UK media today